Key result
Valve-in-valve TAVI yields similar 1-year survival to redo surgery for degenerated stentless aortic valves.
Why the study?
Reinterventions for degenerated stentless aortic xenografts are challenging and the role of valve-in-valve transcatheter techniques compared to redo surgery requires evaluation.
Does valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) improve outcomes compared to reoperation in patients with degenerated stentless aortic xenografts?
Population
52 consecutive patients undergoing reintervention for failed stentless aortic valves
Comparison
Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation vs redo surgery
Design
Cohort study
Follow-up
1 year
Authors
Loading...
ViV-TAVI suits selected high-risk patients but carries notable complications; leaves open standardized selection criteria for reintervention.
Cohort (n=52)
Does valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) improve outcomes compared to reoperation in patients with degenerated stentless aortic xenografts?
Absolute Event Rate: 81.5% vs 83.1%
p-value: p=0.76
ViV-TAVI is a viable alternative to redo surgery for degenerated stentless aortic valves, offering similar 1-year survival but carrying specific procedural risks such as coronary obstruction.
Grubitzsch et al. (2016) conducted a cohort in Degenerated stentless aortic xenografts (n=52). Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) vs. Redo surgery was evaluated on 1-year survival (p=0.76). Valve-in-valve TAVI resulted in similar 1-year survival compared to redo surgery for degenerated stentless aortic valves (81.5% vs 83.1%, P=0.76).
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: